I hope some day I will write a dissertation about Levinas and intercultural contact. I don't have time now, but at least I can express my thoughts on this blog. Levinas says that a relation becomes ethical when I meet another person. The image I create of the other can never coincide with the real person. An individual is unique, he can't be reduced to the (supposed) characteristics of his group. So I should have an open mind for the real person and let go of my prejudices anytime.

8/27/2005

The illusion of utopian multiculturalism

To my post about cultural relativism at Orkut (see below) I got a long reaction from "Michelle". I will publish her reaction her and then my reaction to her.

You say that we have to start with realizing that at the core we are fundamentally the same. I don’t agree with this. At the basis of my own model, coming from Emmanuel Levinas, lies the recognition that we are fundamentally different. This is something we have to accept, we should not try to reduce the other - which is completely different - to the same, there should always remain a separateness between the one and the other. This part of Levinas’ philosophy is very difficult to explain, but I will try it anyway. You say that we are all the same because we laugh and cry, love and hate etc. But we have different fundamental values and a different cultural background. You can see that a stranger laughs, but do you really know how he feels? You can’t stand in his shoes, you cannot see through his eyes, you cannot know if you are really the same as a stranger, because you don’t know him. And this doesn’t count only for complete strangers, but for any other person, also for your partner, family and friends. You cannot stand in somebody else’s shoes and you shouldn’t pretend that you can by saying about somebody else what he thinks, wants and feels. In fact the book of Rudi Visker isn’t called “A philosophy of multiculturalism” - that’s the subtitle - it is something like (it’s difficult to translate): “To go to a stranger but to stay different”.

We are equal, natives and foreigners. We are equal, not because we are the same, but because we are all human beings. There is only one race, the human race. But we are not the same, we are fundamentally different. We have our own identity, we have our own values that we find very important and that determine the way we look at the world. Our values can be strongly opposed to each other at a fundamental level. You want to cook a nice multicultural stew where carrots, potatoes and meat together form a tasty meal. But cultures don’t always fit together so nicely. In reality the stew will be ruined by too much and far too strong chili peppers, which makes that people who aren’t used to hot spices cannot eat it anymore. You can no longer taste the carrot or a potato, you only taste peppers then. You can try to recognize what carrots and peppers have in common but that doesn’t solve the problem.

tum per salamti ho - que la paix soit avec toi zegt:but they live mixed and they bother each other

SiKi zegt:you cannot mix them they're different

tum per salamti ho - que la paix soit avec toi zegt:their values get mixed and opposed views are confronted with each other

SiKi zegt:martin luther king (jr) died fighting for their rights

tum per salamti ho - que la paix soit avec toi zegt:yes :(

tum per salamti ho - que la paix soit avec toi zegt:I think it is possible to have a tasty multicultural society stew but it is not something you get automatically when you put all the different cultures together like that, you need good cooks to make it tasty

SiKi zegt:look nothing is perfect. the culture the food etc. all we humans can do to make things perfect either its food or society or culture

SiKi zegt:there is always a room for error

tum per salamti ho - que la paix soit avec toi zegt:yes

tum per salamti ho - que la paix soit avec toi zegt:what is important is that we try our best

SiKi zegt:this debate will never end you can give the best solution but it won't be finite